The Right of Discovery

TheRight of Discovery

TheRight of Discovery

Theright of discovery dictates that neither the prosecution nor thedefendant side should keep information from the other, which meansthat they should have adequate knowledge before attending a trial(Garland, 2011). However, this situation becomes an exception in caseof constitutional protection against giving testimonial evidence thathas a likelihood of incriminating an individual in future criminalcase.

Accordingto Law Firm (2014), the discovery process involves the defendantsecuring information held by the prosecutor concerning the case ofthe defendant. Moreover, a prosecutor might get a chance to get atleast all the case related information possessed by the defendant. Inthis period, the exchange of evidence that might be used during trialby the prosecutor against the defendant takes place. Such evidence orinformation includes the following any testimony intended by anexpert witness during trial, police reports, booking reports, DNAinformation from the defendant, witnesses’ oral or writtentestimonies, names of the intended witnesses and their addresses,testimony of the defendant, raw evidence from the office of theprosecutor, law enforcement, evidence from the crime scene likephotographs and forensic evidence (Garland, 2011).

Basically,what happens is that the defendant is given any adequate informationor potential evidence. However, information related to the intentionof the prosecutor to acknowledge this evidence is not given to thedefendant (Law Firms, 2014). Garland (2011) suggests that the roleplayed by this evidence or information during their overall legalstrategy is not obtained by the defendant.

Theright of discovery allows the courts to make the criminal justiceprocess effective by allowing the defendant a fair chance during thetrial period, which means that surprise evidences convicting adefendant during the last period of trial are avoided. Furthermore,the courts and the office of the prosecutor might not go trial if thedefendant proves more likely to accept an agreement of plea, when allevidence against him all her is provided to the prosecutor (Garland,2011).

References

Garland,N. M. (2011). Criminalevidence(6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

LawFirms. (2014). DiscoveryProcess in a Criminal case.Retrieved from http://www.lawfirms.com/resources/criminal-defense/criminal-defense- case/discovery.htm